Idaho Statesman Voter Guide
[Censorship Note: The Idaho Statesman edited the answers I submitted to the last two questions. While their public voter guide website states the following, "Candidates' responses have not been edited, other than for language and libel.", the following statement was sent directly to me: "Since we did not ask other candidates to also share their thoughts on the court system and on corporations, we have trimmed your answers to the questions about criminal convictions and bankruptcies to focus just on those immediate questions."
My reply went unanswered, "I'm sure the questions you asked about criminal convictions and bankruptcies were somehow intended to inform the public or vet the candidates; however, it is now clear to me that you had no intention to allow the candidates to use those questions to convey their beliefs about issues related to those topics. Due to the limited response space, I did not explain how I thought those questions were not necessarily a legitimate measure of candidate worthiness; instead, I simply described my view of the judicial and corporate environments that contribute to that belief and what I would do about it."]
University of Idaho, Bachelor of Science in Computer Science (1997)
Prior political experience
Previous campaigns and various political organizations, including leadership positions
Religious and volunteer organizations, including leadership positions
Years living in Idaho
Married, 10 children, 2 grandchildren
Name your three priorities for Idaho. Do you support current policy on them? if not, describe your alternate plan. How would you pay for your proposals that have costs associated with them?
I have one goal in mind, and that is to secure the liberty of the citizens of Idaho. To do that I believe we need to take the following steps:
1. Replace the state constitution with one modeled after the federal constitution. Just as the federal constitution is a contract between sovereign states, the Idaho constitution should form a contract between sovereign counties, respecting the limited role of government at the state level.
2. Repeal all existing Idaho code that does not conform to the proper role of government, which is almost all of it. Most state agencies would need to be disbanded or transitioned to the private sector. In its place, enact legislation that appropriately punishes crime, properly defined as the violation of another’s rights.
3. Enforce the U.S. constitution and nullify any non-conforming actions and policy of the federal government. Additionally, to restore state sovereignty and representation, the state needs to seek repeal of the 14th, 16th, and 17th amendments.
My proposal would eliminate most taxes and free up the economy; however, the citizens of Idaho should know that it would come at the cost of increased individual responsibility.
How should Idaho address the health care needs of the 78,000 residents in the so-called gap population? Do you support Medicaid expansion in some form? Some other proposal? Please address funding for the option you prefer.
The debate is being framed in such a way as to suggest that the government needs to do something to provide health insurance to some missed segment of society. The wrong questions are being asked. The only reason this so-called gap population exists is due to bad policy resulting in government control over the health care and health insurance industries. Why are we not questioning the very existence of Medicaid and Idaho’s implementation of the “Affordable” Care Act? Why are we not questioning the insane amount of regulations placed on the industry?
Medicaid and the “Affordable” Care Act represent socialistic welfare programs– the redistribution of wealth by the force of government. The problem that needs to be solved is not with the gap population, but with the programs that affect the rest of society. We need to repeal all state code related to the regulation of health care and insurance, and nullify the related unconstitutional federal mandates.
The poor can be cared for without the inefficient and demeaning programs dictated by the force of the state. Paying taxes is not a charitable act.
What is the state's obligation to public schools? Is Idaho spending enough on buildings, teachers and operations? How can Idaho improve its go-on rate for students leaving high school?
Public education, the 10th plank of the Communist Manifesto, is the largest welfare program and social control operation in the state. I don’t have the individual right to demand that my neighbor pay for my child’s education under the threat of his life. Similarly, I don’t have the individual right to dictate what my neighbor teaches his child under the threat of his life. And yet, that is exactly what is happening in the name of public education by the state. Government is force, and educational policy implementing public schools is no exception.
We need to remove government control and funding of education by eliminating the mandate to establish “free” schools in the state constitution, repealing existing code related to education, transitioning public schools to the private sector, and nullifying federal control and funding of education.
Spending is not indicative of educational quality, and the poor would be better educated without being homogenized and force fed a humanistic philosophy destructive to liberty by a government program that appeals to the lowest common denominator.
What is your position on the relationship between the federal government, the states and local governments? Is the state right or wrong to hinder or pre-empt action on the local level? Should the state work to take more ownership or control of federal lands in Idaho?
I believe that counties should be sovereign entities rather than subdivisions of the state, and that concept could apply to even more localized geographical boundaries. The powers granted to counties and the state should be defined and restricted to their proper role, much like the federal government was designed to be.
The federal government was created by a compact between sovereign states which restricts federal ownership of land within states to “Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings”. Any land ownership outside of this is unconstitutional and should be nullified by the state.
However, the move to put federal land under state control is short sighted. Government control over lands can be just as problematic at the state level as it is at the federal level. Just as the constitution defines appropriate land ownership for the federal government, we need to restrict state ownership of land in the state constitution. Then, all federal and state lands in excess of these particular use cases should be transferred to private ownership.
Name three actions taken by the Legislature this past session that you opposed. Name three you supported or would support. Explain.
Other than adjourning, I pretty much opposed everything the legislature did this past session, including the decision to comply with the REAL ID Act. This past session was spent preparing 831 new pieces of legislation, introducing 557 bills, and passing 379 of them. New laws establish or maintain control over a seemingly innumerable array of facets involving our lives and livelihood.
Few bills received media attention, but of those, many will point to ones like “constitutional carry”, “anti-abortion” measures, urban renewal reform, and permitting Bibles in public schools as worthy of support. However, the “constitutional carry” bill is yet another instance of the state usurping our natural right to bear arms (flagrantly proclaimed in the Idaho constitution), “allowing” us to bear arms under certain conditions; the “anti-abortion” bills simply continue to authorize abortion after creating more hoops to jump through; urban renewal was reformed, not eliminated; and the Bible could already be used in the public schools– not that it matters, since controlling education by the force of government is wrong even if you may personally agree with the curriculum.
What is the proper role of a part-time citizen Legislature? Do you think Idaho’s current system works? Does the Legislature function well or do you see need for changes or improvements?
The overwhelming amount of legislation being considered in a 75 day period (averaging more than 11 pieces of legislation per day) seems to be a perfectly reasonable work load for our part-time legislature. If those legislators kept up the same rate all year in a full-time scenario, they could put thorough at least 1844 new bills per year. Considering all those who favor big government, it is a wonder we don’t see more of a call for full-time government nannies.
In all seriousness, however, the Idaho legislature is a mess. The vast majority of our new laws were passed unanimously or with very minor opposition. Very few fell along party lines, and even fewer caught the attention of the media. The legislature operates as a rubber stamp for bureaucrats in the administration and this voting pattern continues year after year.
Big government seems to be the goal of all, with an agenda to implement socialism, fascism, and communism. Party lines are meaningless. The idea that there are “good guys” in the legislature falls flat on its face if you look at full voting records rather than handpicked scales designed to further the perception of conservative versus liberal mentalities.
Have you been convicted of, or pleaded guilty to, a misdemeanor or felony or had a withheld judgment? If so, what, when and where?
No. However, I would like to address our judicial system. Prosecuting rights have been usurped by the state. Victims of crime are left without recourse. Courtrooms are simply a formal front for backroom deals. A corrupt judge is honored by the legislature. Juries are purposely misinformed. Prisons have become a business, expanding with those who’s incarceration serves no useful purpose. Parent’s rights are violated by the state in juvenile cases.
We need to rid Idaho code of the fine/incarceration mentality. The consequence of crime should focus on restitution to the victim rather than paying some supposed debt to society or providing income to the state. Incarceration should be limited to those who specifically pose a threat of bodily harm to others. The distinction between civil and criminal cases needs to be eliminated and government needs to recognize the right of a victim to prosecute. I propose the establishment of a victim compensation fund, insuring that victims are properly compensated by those who commit crime. Jury nullification should be recognized. Assistance of counsel should be respected and occupational licensing of attorneys needs to be repealed.
Have you or a company you owned filed bankruptcy? If so, when and where?
No. But speaking of companies, there are a multitude of concerns that should be addressed in our state. Corporatism is alive and well in Idaho; we need to kick the professional lobbyists out of the statehouse and remove the influence of special interest groups funded by large corporations.
The state needs to eschew fascism and stop regulating private businesses. This would include repealing all occupational licensing, industry specific regulations, subsidies, industry commissions, public-private ventures, and wage and price fixing.
Also, the state should not engage in any business enterprise itself (curtail the land board), nor should it invest funds in companies (see the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report). Benefits for state employees and officials should be eliminated in favor of higher wages, as benefits simply dictate how that money is spent.
Most importantly, there needs to be complete individual responsibility in the world of business. Liability needs to be defined and the concept of fictitious legal entities needs to be eliminated.